On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 6:38 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>wrote:
> On 03/24/2011 03:14 PM, Aaron Gustafson wrote:
>
>>
>> That certainly makes sense and is something I hadn't considered, but I do
>> still think we should look for some balance. On one
>> hand there's the incredible power inherent in specifically ordering your
>> transformations and on the other hand there's a
>> desire to easily (and with limited repetition) being able to successfully
>> manage ever more complex stacks of transformations.
>>
>
> Going back to your original problem statement:
>
>
> The issue(s): Based on the current model, it is difficult for authors to
>> manage compound transforms for transitions as well as in the context of
>> the cascade. This issue is exacerbated when it comes to dynamic
>> manipulation
>> (via script) because most browsers supporting transforms currently only
>> expose the current transform state as a matrix, which is not
>> human-readable.
>>
>
> I don't have any solutions for managing the cascade,
> but for dynamic manipulation, it would probably make
> the most sense to introduce better APIs for manipulating
> the value of the 'transform' property.
>
+1. Absolutely! Matrix makes sense if you think like that, but if not,
matrices are incredibly confusing.
> As for the cascade, we have similar problems with multiple
> shadows and backgrounds. Probably they should all be solved
> in the same way.
>
+1
Cheers,
Aaron
----
Aaron Gustafson
Easy Designs, LLC
http://easy-designs.net